Microsoft "Albany" Offers Office and Security as Subscription 281
News.com is reporting that Microsoft has confirmed a subscription service is in the works for the next consumer version of their Office Suite. "Code-named Albany, the product has a single installer that puts Office Home and Student, OneCare, as well as a host of Windows Live services, onto a user's PC. As long as users keep paying for the subscription, they are entitled to the latest versions of the products. Once they stop paying, they lose the right to use any version."
Something of a catch... (Score:5, Interesting)
Once they stop paying, they lose the right to use any version.
So, an office suite linked to a security product and you lose both if you stop paying ... does this sound at all unpalatable to anyone else?
(Apparently; currently the survey on the page says 41% prefer the traditional way of buying Office, 38.5% would rather not buy it at all, and 20.5% think it sounds better).
I suppose the deciding factor is the price -- value for money. And as we know Microsoft has never failed to deliver on that one...
Re:Something of a catch... (Score:5, Insightful)
Also illegal, at least in Canada (Score:5, Informative)
Up here, it's illegal to make it impossible for a person to access their own data. Therefore, while they are allowed to prevent you from making new documents, spreadsheets, etc., they cannot disable the "read-only" features of the software.
Re:Also illegal, at least in Canada (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Also illegal, at least in Canada (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Also illegal, at least in Canada (Score:4, Funny)
Wait. Fuck.
Re:Also illegal, at least in Canada (Score:5, Informative)
I highly doubt this has any applicability to a subscription version of Office. When the subscription runs out, it doesn't suddenly encrypt all of your files. You are still free to bring those files to any of millions of capable machines, any print shop in the world, or use the long existing free "Viewer" versions.
Hello? Data for Ransome Anyone? (Score:4, Interesting)
But, not edit them or otherwise legitimately salvage your data.
It's easy to brush the idea that Microsoft holds your data hostage. Just don't think beyond your current PC. It doesn't bother you, but some of us WANT to open our children's mishmash of pictures and letters when we are old and gray.
This is the classic strategy where dumb money thinks it's wise to pay month-to-month.
I forsee upgrade problems that require extra support that one must pay for among a whole slew of gotchas.
Re:Also illegal, at least in Canada (Score:5, Interesting)
Then of course, there's just telling M$ to stick it and continue to use the current version of Office or switch to Open Office. I don't think most users will want or need anything beyond what is available now. I used to teach classes in Office--very few ever use the advanced features. I feel like MS took too long to get something like this out. It's almost like taking a step back to the mainframe days when programs were routinely put out as a subscription coupled with a help/service plan.
What will be interesting is when Open Office can read/write "Albany" documents. Will MS file a lawsuit?
Re: (Score:2)
I rent an English-Albanian dictionary and then translate a document from English to Albanian.
The rental expires on the dictionary, and I return it.
I can now not access my data despite being in possession of the file.
Is the owner of the dictionary under a legal obligation to allow me to use it to recover my data? Seems doubtful.
In the same way, if you're renting this software from Microsoft, and then the rental expires in acc
Re:Also illegal, at least in Canada (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
In your example, you saved your document in Albanian. There's nothing preventing you from reloading that document in Albanian.
Also, it turns out it's also illegal in the US - L'Oreal Corp. sued one of their IT suppliers who turned off all access to their data after they switched contractors. The courts ruled that the data belonged to L'Oreal, not the contractor, and that the contractor had to make the data available in machine-readable form, even if L'Oreal could no longer create additional data records w
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
How does this work for other subscription services like World of Warcraft? Technically, your character, etc, is your data, though by the EULA Blizzard claims that all data is theirs, so perhaps that's how they get around it, and Microsoft could just do the same.
Also, it isn't impossible to access your data - you can renew your subscription or even use any of a number of free solutions (OpenOffice) to get at it once your subscription lapses. And who knows, they may very well leave read only enabled.
In s
QFT (Score:5, Informative)
This bears repeating.
Re:QFT (Score:5, Funny)
Thats an annoying bear.
Re:Also illegal, at least in Canada (Score:5, Insightful)
Correct, that is how they get around it.
Um, no. Technically, Microsoft could try this gambit; I'm not sure whether, legally, it would work or not. But practically, it'd be a death sentence on Office. Rights to Eleroth the Night Elf is one thing. Rights to your personal correspondence, to the data that your business needs to run, to your personal data, that's another. If Microsoft announced that they owned all the data created by subscription Office, nobody would buy it. Ever.
Re:Also illegal, at least in Canada (Score:4, Informative)
Re:Something of a catch... (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
If Microsoft put in anti-virus software for free then people would be having a fit cow over unfair practices.
Of course you could just get OpenOffice and Linux or you could pick up a Mac.
But after seeing just how wonderful Vista really is why would anybody play with a toy like Linux or OS/X.
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Well, it looks like Slashdotters have been voting--now it's 42.2% would rather use a free alternative, 39% want Office traditional and 18.9% cough*idiots*cough think it sounds appealing.
Oh, and then there's this:
Those who subscribe to Albany will also get several free Microsoft products pushed onto their desktop--including online document
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Something of a catch... (Score:4, Insightful)
renting software always fails. It has no purpose and MSFT is going to charge some obscene amount so that a year of renting you can buy a full version.
Personally for me it doesn't matter. My documents are in ODF, and I can use any numerous applications to open the data, from Open Office, to abi word, to google docs. I can get 100% portable versions of those to stick on a thumb drive, and OS agnostic.
It doesn't matter where I am I can get MY data. Can you do the same with MSFT rentals?
Re:Something of a catch... (Score:4, Informative)
Otherwise, I honestly find that Ubuntu is a much better value. Besides being free it comes with a huge range of applications (free) that I use. In fact, I find it has a lot more features than Windows.
I'm not completely anti-Microsoft and do think Windows is the right decision for some people -- and gamers go without saying. However, my experience is much the opposite of yours. My Ubuntu desktop is much more capable and pleasant than Vista or XP.
It Would be Microsoft Doing This (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
I hope it DOES catch on - for a while... (Score:2)
I hope it DOES catch on - for a while.
It will give consumers a financial incentive to switch to FOSS - every time a bill comes due. B-)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
People currently don't perceive the cost of MS software as it is included in the cost of the computer.
If this becomes the primary distribution model, cheaper (and free) alternatives will be perceived all the more interesting.
Isn't the one-time purchase cost what made MS popular in the first place (against mainframe subscription model) ?
Re: (Score:2)
In the home world it is unlikely to take off, because people don't think in terms of the monthly cost of operating their computer. They want to buy and be done with it. Same reason that subscription music services have never done really well.
But in the large business market this may well succeed. Businesses are accustomed to budgeting and depreciation and all sorts of accounting practices that people don't have to do at home.
Businesses assume that
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
They might--if they perceive it as renting their own data. I predict a lot of business are going to perceive this as paying Microsoft a price in order to access their documents--and Microsoft can change that price any time they feel like it. They aren't going to like that perception. "I am altering the deal.
Re:It Would be Microsoft Doing This (Score:5, Insightful)
Maybe. It's certainly true that business operate on a much different and much more complex accounting and budgeting framework than households, and maybe monthly/yearly payments for software better fit into the whole budgeting/life-cycle/depreciation system. But I rather suspect not.
Businesses are much more concerned with reliability than with novelty. Businesses are also very concerned about having control over where, when, and on what their money is spent. A CIO may buy something like MS Office figuring on a three-year lifecycle, but then realize that there's nothing to be gained by upgrading. Thus running the software longer than the three-year term originally planned represents a savings, and money in the budget for other things.
If this were not the case, most businesses would be running MS Vista and MS Office 2007. In fact very few are, and a significant number of businesses still have a significant number of MS Windows 2000 machines running.
The fact is that a word processor/spreadsheet package is much more like a typewriter than like a telephone line. It's a product that you buy and create documents with, not a service that needs the constant attention and maintenance like a phone network with a huge company behind it. And no business would welcome the possibility of being held hostage by one of their vendors. It's becoming increasingly clear that while applications may be proprietary, there is no reason for data formats to be. It's worth paying for a product for the features it delivers, but not worth the liability if what you create is worthless outside of the application.
I tend to think instead that this move by MS is fairly insignificant play in what is becoming a very significant battle that will determine the future of the company. They're being forced to shift the whole direction of the firm into an area where they have never had any success, and in which there are already very formidable players.
This isn't about software subscriptions, it's about hosted services. MS has seen the future and doesn't like what it sees -- systems, applications, databases, communications, etc all living on the network and available anywhere there is a connection (and in many cases where there is not), regardless of platform.
I work in a middling consultancy that is almost exclusively an MS shop, and I've already seen folks at my firm excited about the Salesforce/Google Apps pairing. We recently migrated our CRM system to Salesforce and the consultants we have on the road are very interested in the ability to review and edit contracts and proposals on the fly, from their Blackberries. They also really like the idea of how chat/mail/calendars can be integrated into particular account records without the clumsiness endemic to Outlook.
We've only just begun looking into an official use of the Google Apps, but there is much interest. I certainly think we'll be moving in this direction well before we start planning a Vista rollout, or even an Office 2007 rollout. And I don't believe that we are in a unique position.
MS is terrified of this because their entire existence depends upon the platform -- primarily Windows but also MS Office and the supporting systems that businesses require, like Exchange and MS SQL. Salesforce plus Google Apps chips away at the need for an MS platform, and certainly is a direct attack on the whole one-user/one-system model that MS has always used. I can get to my Saleforce account, company mail, company calendar, company documents, etc. from anywhere, on anyone's system.
Basically, if
Fantastic (Score:3, Insightful)
Stupidass Microsoft... (And stupidass people paying for that crap...)
Re: (Score:2)
If it's like Albany (Score:5, Funny)
the state capital of NY, it'll cost a lot of money, spend years trying to accomplish anything, and work only part of the year.
Re:If it's like Albany (Score:4, Informative)
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
Hello? ISO? You listening? (Score:3, Interesting)
Albany branch? (Score:2)
Not Unreasonable (Score:5, Insightful)
You currently pay $300 for the standard Microsoft Office 2007.
If all they're doing is spreading out the payment over 3-4 years, with a small premium thrown in, that's not such a bad deal. I'd happily pay a $25-50 premium on software like Office in order to receive constant updates. So if what they want is $115 annually instead of 300 at once, that's fine by me. These products don't usually have more than a 3-4 year life-cycle anyway, and this way instead of being stuck with a single version, you get something which improves over time.
Obviously, the question of how they implement it, what they charge, and how good the "free upgrades" really are will determine uptake of this product. But if you take off your microsoft-bashing hat for a second, this isn't as stupid as it looks.
Re:Not Unreasonable (Score:4, Insightful)
No I don't. Maybe if it has something that I need I would, but it doesn't so I don't.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Not Unreasonable (Score:5, Insightful)
I actually understand why people stick with Windows more than I do Office. To most people Windows appears to come "free" with their computer. Office is always extra. OpenOffice is free, powerful and just as easy to use. Why pay for something when you can get the same feel and functionality for free?
Re:Not Unreasonable (Score:4, Insightful)
If you have your file spread across 3 versions of office with minor to serious incompatabilities, how do you use your old files?
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
That's cuz MS *HAD* to release updates to get more $
With this, they get $ regardless of what they add in.
At the start, they will add really useful stuff that you can only get in "Albany".
Once enough idiots bite, they'll stop improving things, fire half their programmers and hire lawyers.
Why?
-To sue people trying to cancel their Albany subscription.
-To sue OpenOffice for implementing their patented, ISO standard file format.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
However, it sounds too much like a gym membership that doesn't get used. I'm going to guess that google documents and the like will see a lot more usage as these things get more and more costly. Microsoft is a monopoly trying to cash i
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
With this model, if you stop paying, you lose all the benefit of 4 years' payments.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Once you are on a subscription model why would they bother with the new updates? Your paying them every month whether they release Office 2010 or not.
MS has to release new versions right now to maintain its sales revenues.
On a subscription model MS doesn't have to do squat to keep you payin
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
More important, however, is the question of how the updates happen - the reason we haven't gone to 2007 isn't a licensing issue - it's training. Is MS going to force you to accept those updates? Are they going to overhaul the UI while you weren't looking?
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
The problem Microsoft has with Office is that they really want a subscription model, but they don't have subscription value to add. Think abo
I Subscribe to OpenOffice (Score:4, Informative)
My security is also free, is updated regularly, and is pretty secure the way I have it configured. BTW, it's Linux.
Microsoft? Naahhhh...
Tired of Subscriptions (Score:5, Insightful)
Cable, phone, utilities all seems standard to us at this point, but now we have music subscriptions (stop paying, lose your music), radio subscriptions (love that satellite radio), game subscriptions (WoW addicts unite), and now more and more software subscriptions (I'm sorry, licensing).
I can perhaps forgive it for something like antivirus software where you are constantly downloading updates (glad my Mac doesn't need that yet), but Office? When do they slip Windows into that model? Would you like to boot today? Your subscription has expired, please enter a valid credit card.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
Floppy? What's a floppy?
Re: (Score:2)
Most things involving subscriptions have fees to sign up. This is like removing leasing as an option and renting to be the only option.
The difference here is you don't have a choice, let alone that there is a monumental subscription cancellation fee (note: losing the ability to use a program completely).
This is like WGA validation version 3.0
Microsoft Albania... (Score:5, Funny)
Once they START paying... (Score:5, Funny)
Software Maintenance (Score:3, Insightful)
so in other words (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I believe this because I think it's already real (Score:3, Interesting)
I'm not thrilled with the snappiness of the performance of Open Office but clearly this is the way I will go the next time around.
Other than XP, MS Office and some tools related to scanner and digitizer tablet hardware (which is essentially free once you buy the hardware), I have cost free software on all my machines.
Freespire (Ubuntu) here I come!
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Odd... Until last year I still ran an ancient version of Office (95 or 98 I think), but last year the Genuine Advantage thingie offered me a free upgrade to Office 2007. I was a bit suspicious about some malware on my computer offering me a bogus, virus ridden version, but it turned out to be all legit.
I did find that the most important change is t
Pushing more people away? (Score:3, Interesting)
And thus... (Score:2)
(Cue "DUHN DUHN DUHNNNN" music.)
Re: (Score:2)
(Cue "DUHN DUHN DUHNNNN" music.)
More agile perhaps? (Score:4, Informative)
Agile development also allows the quality of the software to be under constant incremental improvement. But this has a downside as well: it becomes very hard to pick a point in time to stop releasing patches and instead tell customers "now you have to buy a new version", especially since the next version that the company releases is "just" another incremental improvement over the previous release.
So basically agile development practices can spell death for the "Shiny New Version" business model, and thus an alternative revenue stream needs to be found.
Agile software allows developers to consistently and continuously release incrementally improved versions of an application. It therefore makes sense for companies to continuously pay incremental amounts for use of that software.
Selling the concept of "it will get better over time" to who ever is making business purchasing decisions may not be easy, but in the end, if some sales person can pull it off, it will be to everyone's benefit.
Customers will be able to have a more direct and immediate interaction with software companies, and software companies will be able to practice the software development methodologies that they KNOW they should be practicing.
Note in my defense:
Some people may take offense that agile software means no more big new versions, but I'd argue that it feels intuitively 'wrong' to fix a software bug that is annoying many users, but is too low priority to make the cut for a service pack, and then sit around knowing that users will not get to see this trivial fix for years, just because of the common business model that is used to sell big box software.
Disclaimer: I'm a Microsoft employee (been on
(Besides, I've been here under a year and I work in mobile compilers!)
Re: (Score:2)
So chill and congrats on your great job at a very rich enterprise. Hope you do well.
Having said that.... well... ive already posted my own mind in my own comment, thank you very much.
The Onecare tie-in is cute. (Score:5, Interesting)
Antivirus, though, is the closest thing to an exception(well, that and MMORPGs). People are neither happy nor efficient about it; but they often do end up paying for their subscription.
Connecting a product whose subscription feels "natural"(virus signatures are a service, and are pay per unit time) with a product whose subscription feels "artificial"(Office suites can be priced as services; but nothing about them makes them so) is an interesting tactic. I wonder if it will work.
Microsoft has wanted subscription software for years, so this isn't too surprising; but it may well have gained urgency from the push toward really, really cheap computers. Full upfront software cost is a hard sell on cheap hardware; but you might be able to make it palatable by stretching it into a subscription(plus, there will finally be a way to exterminate those pesky Office 97 users!).
The idea makes me a bit nervous, though, because it points to a model of computer use very, very similar to today's cellphone model. Cheap hardware, low upfront cost; but continual, tightly controlled, nickel and diming throughout the life of the product. Unfortunately, for all the progress they have achieved, cellphones are a really miserable lesson in why the openness of the PC world is so vital.
God, what have we done to deserve this? (Score:4, Insightful)
You have to be incredebly stupid, and still a total masochist, to even think about RENTING it.
Jeesus, please save us from all this ignorance.
This really isn't so bad... (Score:2)
If their prices are reasonable this could prove to be a much better value for some of their existing customers, and at the same time provide a great reason for their other customers to look into OpenOffice.
Everybody wins. Go Microsoft!
Re: (Score:2)
Nothing like not even owning something that you pay for at the same rate as previous. Yes, that sounds like a good idea.
Purple Kool-aid or plague? (Score:3, Interesting)
I've been happy with OpenOffice for several years while MS Office has produced interesting, and embarrassing, format failures between editions. One example, on a Vista laptop, tried with both Office 2003 and 2007, failed to accurately render many company Powerpoint slides that had worked with Powerpoint 2003 on XP, for important meetings. As much as one would like to dismiss MS Office users as drinking Purple Kool-Aid, a self curing problem, recognizing them as plague spreaders would be closer to the mark.
Everyone say it along with me (Score:2)
Microsoft tax. (Score:2)
"always up-to-date aspect of the service" (Score:3, Insightful)
>always up-to-date aspect of the service," Microsoft group product
> manager Bryson Gordon said.
Indeed we do. We're called Ubuntu users. The little orange icon lets us know when ANY of our programs have updates available and then DOESN'T pester the crap out of us if we don't install them right away.
And our subscriptions are always paid up.
Nice computer ya' got there... (Score:2)
The obligatory:
"Nice computer ya' got there. It'd be a shame if anything happened to it."
Selling security updates as a SERVICE? It may be legal. It may make good business sense and maximize returns to stockholders, but dyn bach, it's unethical in my book.
It Will Solve Piracy (Score:2)
Could it be..... (Score:2)
Mainframe hosted apps (Score:2)
It isn't much difference to what they ( and other companies, just to be fair ) do to enterprise customers already.
Get All Your Updates for Free (Score:3, Interesting)
Great, for those of us who live in Albany/Troy (Score:4, Funny)
"Albany window repair"
"Microsoft Albany repair corrupt files <technet.microsoft.com>"
"Hot dogs in Albany"
"Albany is about as useful as a hot dog dropped on the floor <technet.microsoft.com>"
"Used Cars in Albany"
"Microsoft Chairman Gates is now selling used cars after the failure of Microsoft Albany <slashdot.org>"
by cutting prices! (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re:by cutting prices! (Score:4, Insightful)
Pricing it higher will create the impression that this is a more worthwhile package (and vice versa: a lower-priced package will be less worthwhile). And it creates income that can be used to further build up the open source industry.
Re:by cutting prices! (Score:5, Funny)
Uh, No It's Not... (Score:3, Insightful)
Microsoft has really screwed up and doesn't seem to know where to go or what to do now that Vista crashed and burned. It will be hard for them to overcome the bad rap they earned on that one.
And Linux being free means that anyone that wants to try it out just needs to download it or copy CDs from someone else. They can try it whenever they want and if they like it, they keep right on using it.
Microsoft's days are numbered. P
Re: (Score:2)
Their products are complicated and the licensing and sales packages are complicated. I still can't tell you the difference between Vista Premium & Ultimate without looking it up.
A subscription model is even worse. Cust
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Well, we ARE talking about Microsoft.
Re:What Happened? (Score:4, Informative)
From that perspective, I don't see this as out of touch with their customers. I'm sure a majority of the people who buy Office won't want this Albany thing, but I'll bet some do and those customers will be served better.
Large corporations I can especially see going for this. You budget for it and forget about it. It's how they tend to roll.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
I agree that a subscription model for businesses would make some sort of sense but this is aimed at "consumers".
The lights are on but nobody's home.
Re: (Score:2)
Ironically I feel if they had implemented this model 10 years ago it likely would have been accepted and become the norm (and MS would have forever controlled office software). Introducing it now, it is like